REVIEW 1 cited by
Check-Eval: A Checklist-based Approach for Evaluating Text Quality
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Evaluating the quality of text generated by large language models (LLMs) remains a significant challenge. Traditional metrics often fail to align well with human judgments, particularly in tasks requiring creativity and nuance. In this paper, we propose \textsc{Check-Eval}, a novel evaluation framework leveraging LLMs to assess the quality of generated text through a checklist-based approach. \textsc{Check-Eval} can be employed as both a reference-free and reference-dependent evaluation method, providing a structured and interpretable assessment of text quality. The framework consists of two main stages: checklist generation and checklist evaluation. We validate \textsc{Check-Eval} on two benchmark datasets: Portuguese Legal Semantic Textual Similarity and \textsc{SummEval}. Our results demonstrate that \textsc{Check-Eval} achieves higher correlations with human judgments compared to existing metrics, such as \textsc{G-Eval} and \textsc{GPTScore}, underscoring its potential as a more reliable and effective evaluation framework for natural language generation tasks. The code for our experiments is available at \url{https://anonymous.4open.science/r/check-eval-0DB4}
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Think When Needed: Model-Aware Reasoning Routing for LLM-based Ranking
A per-instance router trained to predict the utility gain of reasoning decides when an LLM should think before ranking, improving NDCG by up to 6.3% while cutting generation tokens by up to 75%.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.